Cigarette smoking first became a mass “epidemic” in the United States, United Kingdom and other more wealthy countries in the early 20th century after the launch of inexpensive, mass produced cigarettes. As shown in FIG. 1, this “epidemic” usually develops in four stages. Often, the uptake and ensuing adverse effects of smoking occur earlier and to a greater degree among men. The four stages of a smoking “epidemic” for men are generally: (1) an initial slow rise in smoking prevalence, (2) a more rapid rise in smoking prevalence with an increase in the number of smoking related deaths, (3) a decrease in smoking prevalence with a more rapidly increasing number of smoking related deaths, and (4) a continued decline in smoking prevalence with a parallel trend in smoking related diseases. Generally, a decline in smoking prevalence is trailed approximately two to three decades later by the parallel trend in smoking related diseases.
The number of smokers worldwide is gradually rising. Presently, an average of 35% of the worldwide population between ages 15 to 64 smokes. A rapid increase in smoking prevalence throughout the developing world is one of the key threats to present and future world health. For most smokers quitting smoking is the single most important act to improve their health. Encouraging smoking cessation is one of the most effective and cost effective actions that health professionals can suggest for improving health and prolonging patients' lives. Based on data from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 24.7% of adults in the United States were smokers in 1997. Smoking in turn has lead to nearly 430,000 preventable deaths. Cigarette smoking is the single largest avoidable cause of death and disability in developed countries. One of the national health objectives for the United States in 2000 was to reduce the prevalence of cigarette smoking among adults to less than 15%. Roughly 20.9% of adults in the United States were current cigarette smokers in 2005. This figure reveals that the 8-year decline in smoking prevalence among adults in the United States has not met the 2000 objectives. In fact, the decline in smoking prevalence may be stalling when considering increases in population. As seen in FIG. 2, the smoking movement in United Kingdom depicts a similar trend. An estimated 2.3% of adults in the United States in 2005 used smokeless tobacco. Additionally, 42.5% of current cigarette smokers did quit smoking for at least one day in the preceding 12 months in an attempt to quit smoking permanently.
For most countries, the situation is worse. The 1995 smoking prevalence data from studies in 139 countries show 29% of persons aged 15 years or older were regular smokers globally in 1995. Four fifths of the world's 1.1 billion smokers in 1995 resided in low- or middle-income countries, with East Asian countries constituting an excessively high percentage (38%) of the world's smokers. Males comprised four fifths of all smokers. FIG. 3 shows cigarette smoking by deprivation level in the United Kingdom. Forthcoming decades will see rapid increases in tobacco-related deaths in low- and middle-income regions, even in rich countries such as the United Kingdom.
Half of the smokers will die prematurely of a disease caused by their smoking, losing an average of eight years of life. These figures are based upon an estimated 4 million deaths per year from tobacco in 1999, and these figures are anticipated to climb to an estimated 10 million deaths per year from tobacco by the 2030's. On the basis of the 2002 smoking trends, tobacco-attributable disease will kill about 500 million people over the next five decades.
Current evidence clearly indicates that smoking cessation reduces the risk of death from tobacco-related diseases. For example, lung cancer, which is particularly deadly with 85% of the patients dying within five years of their diagnosis, is almost entirely preventable. People who quit smoking reduce their risk of dying over the next 15 years by 50% compared with those who still smoke. For example, among physicians in the United Kingdom those who stopped smoking before the inception of major disease avoided most of the excess peril of smoking. The advantages of quitting were prevalent in those who suspended early (between ages 35 and 44) but were still momentous in those who quit later (between ages 45 and 54 years). While much of this high mortality can be reduced if smokers discontinue smoking, quitting is unusual, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. For instance, the occurrence of childhood mortality, smoking, and tuberculosis in India is three times higher among the lowest income or education groups than among the highest. One simple solution to reduce the mortality rate is increasing cigarette tax to four-fifths of the retail price which would roughly double the price of cigarettes in low-income countries. This practice, along with complete bans on advertising and promotion, could quadruple smoking cessation rates to nearly 30%. Based on recent data the cited combined strategies would ultimately prevent somewhere between 60 to 120 million deaths between 2002 and 2050.
The impact of smoking on longevity is well documented, is dependent on the levels of exposure, and is greater among younger smokers. FIG. 4 shows the numbers and relative risk of death by cause due to smoking in the United Kingdom. The data in FIG. 4 shows the strongest cause-specific links with respiratory cancers and chronic obstructive pulmonary ailments; in numeric terms, the greatest health impacts of smoking are on respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. Smokers are also at greater danger of several non-fatal diseases, such as osteoporosis, periodontal disease, impotence, male childlessness, and cataracts.
Cigarette smoking is also likely to have toxic effects on the retina which can cause severe and irreversible vision loss with increased risk of 2-3 fold in current smokers compared with never-smokers. Smoking in pregnancy is allied with enhanced rates of fetal and prenatal loss and diminished birth weight. Passive smoking after birth is associated with bed death and respiratory disease in childhood and lung cancer, heart disease, and stroke in adults. It is now well established in clinical practice that the toxic constituents of cigarette smoke, particularly nicotine, carbon monoxide, and hydrogen cyanide, also undermine expeditious wound repair. This is because nicotine reduces nutritional blood flow to the skin. Carbon monoxide diminishes oxygen transport and metabolism, whereas hydrogen cyanide hinders the enzyme systems necessary for oxidative metabolism and oxygen transport at the cellular level. Approximately 11 minutes of life expectancy is lost from smoking a single cigarette.
Another major disorder is alcoholism, which poses a substantial health problem, costing approximately $165 billion per year just in the United States. In addition to the above health concerns, cigarette smoking is more common in alcoholics than in the general population, with as many as 80-95% of alcoholics being smokers. This high percentage of co-morbidity reflects overlapping biochemical mechanisms of nicotine and alcohol in the central nervous system, which seems to result in even greater addiction to both drugs. Needs exist for new products that offer a combination therapy for smoking and alcoholism.
The adverse health effects and deadly diseases caused by smoking are attributed to nicotine and cigarette smoke. Nicotine is the addictive agent that prevents smokers from quitting, and is possibly responsible for more undesirable health consequences than any other single compound. The conversion of nicotine, the most common alkaloid found in tobacco, by the body into chemicals such as amino ketones have been shown to cause various diseases. Cigarette smoke contains more than 4,000 chemical compounds including at least 60 carcinogens. The carcinogenic compounds in cigarette smoke can be divided into four types: 1) nitrosamines, generally considered as the most deadly cancer-causing agents in tobacco smoke; 2) aldehydes, produced by the burning of sugars and cellulose in tobacco; 3) polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH's), which form in the cigarette behind the burning tip; and 4) traces of heavy metals present in tobacco as a result of fertilizers used on the plant.
Historically, the development of a safer cigarette has been hampered for three reasons. First, and most importantly, removal of the toxins out of smoke has been a technological challenge because the taste and smoking sensations has not been satisfactorily preserved. Second, the cigarette companies were initially reluctant, due to legal problems, to admit that their “existing” products were dangerous. Third, the profound distrust of the cigarette companies by anti-tobacco activists and health officials played an obstructionist role even when significant progress was being made in a given area. For example, the consumer demand for a safer cigarette led the cigarette makers to gradually reduce the average tar level of cigarettes from 46.1 mg of tar per cigarette to 12.0 mg from 1944 to 1994. Lower-tar cigarettes appear to reduce the lung cancer risks of smoking, but not many of the other hazards. As discussed below, this and similar shortcomings led the anti-tobacco activists, health officials, and Food and Drug Administration to focus, for example, on eliminating smoking behavior and discouraging the promotion of safer cigarettes, rather than fostering additional technological innovations to radically promote cigarette safety, similar to safety improvements in motor vehicles. Collectively, such issues dissuaded the cigarette makers to aggressively conduct more research towards the development and marketing of safer cigarette.
The filter cigarettes introduced in the 1950's were the first attempt by the cigarette companies to introduce a safer cigarette through reduction of the tar level. Sales of filter cigarettes surged from less than 1 percent of the market in 1950 to 87 percent in 1975, but little evidence was presented to suggest that filter cigarettes were any healthier than regular cigarettes. Based on a 2006 court ruling even the alleged light or ultra-light cigarettes used today are marketing ploys and are not better than the full-strength smokes because, for example, the smokers compensate for the lower nicotine levels from the low-tar cigarettes by puffing more often or through deeper inhalation.
To remove the toxins from a conventional cigarette without altering the taste or smoking experience, cigarette makers initiated extensive research in four areas during 1960s: 1) selective filtration of the most noxious substances in cigarette smoke, such as carbon monoxide; 2) the removal or lowering of nicotine and the four types of carcinogenic compounds cited above; 3) the development of synthetic tobacco and tobacco substitutes; and 4) increasing nicotine levels in low-tar cigarettes to prevent compensation by smokers for a loss of nicotine. Unfortunately, lowering the levels of one or two hazardous compounds either raised the levels of other unsafe compounds, made the cigarette “taste” unacceptable to the smokers, or raised concerns by health groups and the cigarette companies. For example, a new cigarette, FACT, introduced by Brown & Williamson in 1975, was withdrawn from the market after two years though it could selectively eliminate certain compounds, including cyanide, from cigarette smoke. Similarly, a cigarette developed in the “XA project” in the 1970's by Liggett Group, Inc. contained catalysts such as palladium blended with tobacco to destroy PAH's formed behind the cigarette's burning tip, but this project was terminated due to pressure by other cigarette makers because of a direct or implied admission that all other cigarettes were hazardous. In addition, due to opposition by health group, the cigarettes introduced in 1977 by British firms Imperial, Gallaher, and Rothmans were removed from the market after a few months although tobacco was replaced with less toxic substitutes, including ingredients made from wood pulp. These and similar situations caused other cigarette companies to begin reducing their efforts by early 1980's to develop a safer cigarette, and even hiding some of the results of prior research, as illustrated in the 1994 lawsuit by the State of Minnesota against the tobacco industry. A former Philip Morris researcher testified in 1998 that the company abandoned promising research to eliminate cadmium, a lung irritant, from tobacco to protect itself against additional liability.
Beginning mid-1980's, cigarette makers began to market high-tech cigarettes that were supposedly safer, or more socially acceptable with less visible side stream smoke or less odor. A recent study reveals that 28 such projects had been underway since 1970's at RJ Reynolds, Philip Morris, British American Tobacco, and Lorillard tobacco companies. Despite these efforts and heavy investment on research, almost every product developed was unacceptable in actual product tests or test markets. Smokers required complete elimination of secondhand smoke to please non-smokers, they were usually reluctant to forfeit their own smoking pleasure for the benefit of others, and favored smoke-free environments to cigarettes that generated less secondhand smoke. For example, the high-tech cigarette called PREMIER introduced in 1988 by RJ Reynolds after an investment of nearly $800 million dollars in research was almost smokeless, reducing the cancer-causing compounds inhaled through heating aluminum capsules having tobacco pellets. This cigarette, perhaps the greatest technological innovation affecting cigarettes, was removed from the market in 1989 because it required its own instruction booklet to light it, did not taste like regular cigarettes to some smokers, consumers did not get used it, and the cigarette faced regulation by FDA as a drug. The PREMIER brand eventually evolved into the ECLIPSE smokeless cigarette in 1994, which was similar to a regular cigarette, but claiming reduction in secondhand smoke by 85 to 90 percent to be more socially acceptable. It differed from a regular cigarette in that the nicotine was extracted by heating the tobacco with air passed through a burning charcoal heat source at lower temperature. Because ECLIPSE has simpler smoke chemistry, consisting of 80% glycerol and water, it contained fewer toxic components resulting in reduced mutagenicity and cytotoxicity in in-vitro tests and fewer DNA adducts. In more recent studies, however, public health officials showed that ECLIPSE appears to be at least as toxic as some commercially available cigarette brands, and produces more carbon monoxide and higher levels of other carcinogenic PAH's compared to the “light” brands such as NOW and CARLTON. Importantly, when glycerin is burned, it is known to be carcinogenic.
As to nicotine, which is mainly connected to the difficulty of quitting smoking, Philip Morris made an important contribution. The company had noted that older, female, low-tar cigarette smokers are generally most interested in the nicotine-free cigarette. A supercritical carbon dioxide process was used to remove nicotine from tobacco, leading to a “97% nicotine-free” cigarette under the brand names NEXT and MERIT FREE, which were test marketed in 1989. Granted, these cigarettes were actually designed to deter smokers from quitting, and tobacco critics claimed that NEXT had higher tar levels than some cigarettes. However, the products promoted further technological developments towards safer cigarettes. Anti-smoking groups petitioned the FDA to designate nicotine as a drug and to begin a broader range of regulatory actions against cigarettes. Although the idea of the reduced-nicotine products appealed to smokers, Philip Morris never launched NEXT after poor consumer reactions to the actual cigarette. Several versions of MERIT are currently available, with one version, under the packaging name ULTIMATE KING FILTER BOX, having very low levels of tar (1 mg) and nicotine (01.mg).
Another high-tech cigarette developed by Philip Morris in 1988 is ACCORD, which had to be used with a special kit having a puff-activated electronic lighter and a battery charger. To smoke, most of the cigarette was inserted into a tube-shaped lighter equipped with sensors that controlled the temperature of the heated tobacco for reducing carcinogenic compound production and side smoke. As the smoker sucked on the lighter, a microchip sensed the puff to send a burst of heat to the tobacco. The process gave the smoker one drag, a display offered the number of remaining puffs before recharging the batteries, typically required after using the cigarette pack. The cigarette was test marketed only in Richmond, Va., and is no longer available partly because the lighter was bulky and cumbersome to use, the smoker had to learn a completely new smoking practice, and the cigarette still produced carcinogenic products. The tar (3 mg) and nicotine (0.2 mg) of ACCORD were higher than some versions of MERIT.
Another promising step towards safer cigarettes involved development of nitrosamine-free cigarettes as nitrosamines are cancer causing compounds. A special tobacco curing process allowed cigarette makers such as Brown & Williamson and RJ Reynolds to drastically reduce the formation of tobacco-specific nitrosamines in the tobacco used in special brands. One must note, however, that cigarettes without nitrosamines produce other carcinogens.
The cigarette industry has been unable to offer a safe cigarette despite heavy investment, and as far as the consumer is concerned the safest cigarette is no cigarette at all, which is not a realist goal. Even though the public has come to recognize smoking hazards, in many cases they have been reluctant or unable to drop the habit because of addiction to nicotine or due to deriving pleasure from holding a cigarette and drawing air through the cigarette via the hand-to mouth action.
Various techniques have been advanced on controlled nicotine delivery to aid smoking cessation. The five major pharmacotherapies are: 1) nicotine gums; 2) nicotine patches; 3) nicotine nasal sprays; 4) nicotine inhalers; and 5) sustained-release bupropion hydrochloride, a non-nicotine medication. Other examples of smoking cessation aids include: 1) nicotine nose drops; 2) nicotine lozenges; 3) compositions comprising nicotine metabolites; 4) drinkable nicotine solutions; and 5) smoke-free cigarettes.
A significant effort has been underway over the development of smokeless cigarettes.
One focus has been based on treatment to help individuals to give up the smoking habits via physical devices. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 2,445,476 offers a mixture of volatile agents and essential oils (such as 50% menthol, 20% peppermint oil, 10% eucalyptus oil, 10% spearmint oil, and 10% wintergreen oil) as a substitute for an all-tobacco cigarette. This mixture is adsorbed on the cigarette fillers such as wool yarn and cotton rolls, but inhalation of the volatile mixture requires no cigarette lighting. Similarly, the sucking pipe in U.S. Pat. No. 2,764,154 provides enclosures suitable for atomization/vaporization of tobacco fragrance dissolved in drinking alcohol, thus allowing inhalation by the user at non-smoking places such as theatres, buses, and hospitals. U.S. Pat. No. 3,365,102 shows a simulated cigarette constructed to contain and dispense through sipping a limited volume of liquid beverages such as flavored syrups or liquid, medical preparations, tobacco extracts, or other potable liquid suitable to the individual taste. In U.S. Pat. No. 3,683,936 the industrially accepted process of micro-encapsulation is utilized to implant a simulated smoking device with the flavor and aroma of tobacco smoke for passage into the mouth of the user without lighting the cigarette to create smoke. U.S. Pat. No. 3,789,840 illustrates a device that offers a chemical substance such as a lozenge to suppress the craving for smoking and also to satisfy the psychological requirement associated with giving up smoking through the use of simulated ash which can be luminous under the control of the smoker. U.S. Pat. No. 3,200,819 describes a smokeless non-tobacco cigarette in which the burning tobacco and paper are replaced with heated, moist flavored air having perhaps medication. The device requires a battery for heating purposes. U.S. Pat. No. 4,429,703 discloses a simulated cigarette which may be filled with an aromatic substance such as menthol to give a pleasant taste and smell. Such devices, however, may fail to provide an adequate psychological and physiological lift received either by the tobacco smoker or the user of cigarette substitutes offering nicotine, as described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,774,971. Considering that oxygen is a lift-providing substitute for tobacco, U.S. Pat. No. 3,631,856 outlines a simulated cigarette having a container of oxygen under pressure to provide a mixture of oxygen and a pleasant fragrance. The simulated cigarette disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,184,496 allows a user, while simulating the action of smoking a cigarette or cigar, to circulate the air surrounding his nose and mouth which may be laden with actual cigarette or cigar smoke of others in the vicinity. The smokeless artificial cigarette outlined in U.S. Pat. No. 4,995,407 contains no tobacco and no nicotine, but utilizes beads or pellets emitting a stress-reducing vapor composed of at least one or more substances such as nutmeg oil, mace extract, neroli oil, valerian oil, myristicin, elemicin, and isoelemicin. Most of the beads are placed within the space in a tube containing a porous filler material, flavoring and aromatic substances, and two porous plugs which may include no or one or more beads. The act of oral inhalation through the tube provides a physiologically effective amount of vapor that produces a sense of satisfaction for the user. Patent Application Publication No. US 2002/0179101A1 also proposes a tubular body of material having a variety of taste and ingredients, but with no nicotine and tobacco, for suction by the user to receive psychological and physiological satisfaction, and thus reduce smoking. Air is drawn through a passage in the tubular material into the mouth of the user, thus simulating smoking.
Several patents on smokeless cigarettes have centered on controlled nicotine delivery. For example, the device disclosed under U.S. Pat. No. 4,393,884 enables a user to inhale pressurized nicotine or tobacco-like formulations on demand. The substance and the aerosol propellant such as nitrogen may be placed in the same or separate compartments, depending on the application. In contrast, the device under U.S. Pat. No. 4,284,089 offers the user vaporizable nicotine at room temperature and pressure without heating or burning tobacco. The device includes a constricted passageway formed by an absorbent material impregnated with a liquid nicotine mixture. The sucking action of the mouth increases air or gas velocity in the constricted passageway, resulting in a lower pressure suitable for enhanced vaporization of liquid nicotine. Clearly, the absorbent materials may also include volatile liquid ingredients to adjust the flavor for final nicotine vapor mixture. An improved version of this simulated smoking device, described by the same inventor under U.S. Pat. No. 4,813,437, utilizes fibrous materials for one or more nicotine bearing sections. To create some pressure drop for improving the release of nicotine-bearing vapors as air is drawn through the device, a primarily unobstructed insulating section is linearly arranged with a nicotine bearing section. To optimize the performance of cited devices, that is, to encourage the amount of nicotine that is uniformly vaporized without formation of unvaporized nicotine droplets, U.S. Pat. No. 4,793,366 discloses a device using microporous filament fibers for nicotine bearing. The cigarette-like device described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,041,789 is a relatively simple nicotine inhaler with air drawn in by the user. It consists of a long tube filled with porous polymeric material that has absorbed a solution of a volatile nicotinomimetic agonist in an amount effective for its released vapors to meet the physiological desires. The nicotine desire is addressed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,293,883 through the use of an array of small nicotine-containing ampules located within the mouth filter of the smokeless device. The simple device outlined under U.S. Pat. No. 5,284,163 also offers a smoke-free cigarette substitute that includes a tubular sleeve having a nicotine-containing carrier. However, nicotine is drawn into the oral cavity of the user through chewing. When pressure is applied to the filter liquid nicotine is released into the mouth of the user. This feature may be a disadvantage for some users as liquid nicotine has an extremely bitter, almost caustic taste. Patent Application Publication No. US2003/0111088A1 describes a tubular medication delivery device that supplies nicotine along with another drug in solution form. The mixture is essentially helpful for dispensing nicotine and naltrexone to manage patients who are smokers and also endure another addiction, such as alcoholism. In a previous disclosure under U.S. Patent Application No. 2002/0059939A1 the same inventor presented a similar device solely to deal with smoking cessation through nicotine treatment.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,293,883 also provides smell and sensation of a regular cigarette as air is drawn through two chambers containing unburned and pre-burned tobacco. This is also achieved in U.S. Pat. No. 4,892,109, but through an exothermic chemical reaction that heats air before its interaction with a charcoal, tobacco, or porous substrate including flavorant substances. The heated air carries tobacco flavor to the smoker's mouth without tobacco combustion. Patent Application Publication No. US 2005/0236006A1 describes several similar smoking and tobacco use cessation devices requiring no ignition and burning of substances. In one configuration, the device has two chambers, one for an exothermic reaction to heat the air before interaction in a second chamber with a source of tobacco, tobacco substitute, nicotine or nicotine substitute to cause evaporation. Further options include the delivery of substances such as vitamins, neutraceuticals, energy enhancers, aspirin, diet aids, weight loss additives, caffeine, breath enhancers and the like, for any desired effect. U.S. Pat. No. 4,911,181 offers several versions of a simulated smoking device through the use of mouthpiece that incorporates a plug of chewing tobacco or tobacco insert in a tube with a pumping component at its end or a tube with collapsible wall. Chewing or sucking creates a partial vacuum, resulting in the withdrawal of saliva from the user's mouth which interacts with tobacco for recirculation to the user's mouth. Commercial smokeless cigarettes have been introduced based on some of the concepts discussed above.
Nearly all smokeless cigarettes discussed above have the shape of a regular cigarette and provided the user with either a mixture of volatile agents, liquid substances, tobacco aromas, tobacco substitutes, or nicotine/nicotine substitutes as replacements for an all tobacco cigarette. None of these devices, however, addressed a key “smoking ritual”: a constantly shifting grayish white stream that looks like or resembles cigarette smoke. Several methods, including chemical generation and aerosol formation have been attempted to reproduce cigarette smoke.
Several chemical-based approaches may be used to generate a white vapor, but their applications in a smokeless cigarette device are not practical due to several reasons such as size, cost, or possible heath restrictions. For example, normal liquefied gases may be used to produce fog, as in stage shows and concerts using a “fog machine”. In contact with air these liquids generate copious amount of white vapors. The visible white trails are liquid water vapor condensed by the low temperature of the vapor evaporating from the liquid. Colder gas and damper location air produce superior fog. Liquid helium is a good choice because of its temperature of −269° C., but it is very costly. Liquid nitrogen (−196° C.) offers a large amount of white fog cloud, good cost-efficiency, and non-toxicity as the gas is present in air in large quantities (78%), but is not suitable for use in small locations. Liquid carbon dioxide (−78° C.) and dry ice (solid CO2 or solid carbon dioxide) offer a grey-white fog, but should not be handled in confined spaces as air containing more than 10% by volume of CO2 is toxic. The normal concentration of CO2 in air is less than a tenth of a percent. In addition, these liquids in contact with skin cause cold-burning, and thus are very dangerous in a liquid state. Boiling water from 100 to 200 degrees Celsius can generate a cloud-like fog, but such a vapor cannot be introduced into the mouth.
A water-based solution advertised as “fog juice” is often used in a “fog machine”. All commercial fog machines require electrical power ranging from 400 to 1300 watts. According to one source, the fog is produced by heating the fog juice, which is a mixture of propylene glycol and triethylene glycol, mixed with 20 percent water. The fluid is directed into a narrow channel inside a heated metal block and is superheated before it is allowed to travel through a very small nozzle where the vaporized fog is expelled under high pressure. The nozzle and a protective cover become very hot during operation, and must not be placed near anything that may catch on fire. At high temperatures, the fog juice can decompose to harmful byproducts that may affect health. Similarly, mixing fumes from hydrochloric acid and ammonia (and also ammonium carbonate), as suggested in an early U.S. Pat. No. 726,037, forms a white cloud of ammonium chloride, but the approach is neither healthy nor environmentally green. Likewise, smoke generated from non-tobacco substances and other chemicals also produce health problems. A smokeless device in Patent Application Publication No. US 2005/0016553AI offers a two-chamber arrangement, with the first chamber providing an aroma evocative of the smell of flavor of burning tobacco or other fragrances. The aromatic compounds are deposited on a liner or are encapsulated in micro-cells located within the first chamber. The aroma is released after the user scratches the liner or micro cells using, for example, a brush-like insert. The second chamber includes an amount of fine powder such as talc, or diatomaceous earth, which upon agitation, such as an ash flicking motion by the user, causes a small volume of the powder to flow through the device outlet aperture to simulate smoke. A check valve prevents powder particles from being sucked into the first chamber, thus not allowing them to enter the mouth of the user. A similar device may also have a tip that gives the appearance of glowing embers. Alternatively, a light emitting diode may be utilized with a red or orange light-transmitting plastic for the cap end.
Several devices have been suggested to deliver smoking flavor in the form of aerosol. A device in U.S. Pat. No. 4,765,347 delivers flavor via an aerosol generated by mechanical dispersion of a liquid into a flowing gas stream. The device consists of: 1) an outer container providing a pathway for airflow; and 2) an inner liquid container with a solution delivery tube placed at the center of a narrow aperture to cause air acceleration during puffing. This acceleration creates a region of lower pressure next to the output region of the solution delivery tube, relative to the pressure experienced by the liquid within the container, and is sufficient to draw a liquid column for dispersion as an aerosol into the mouth end region. Note that the flavor varies depending on the user. The volume of a puff of aerosol varies most generally from about 25 ml to about 35 ml during a puff period ranging from 1 to nearly 2.5 seconds. Alternatively, the flavor bed of tobacco or tobacco-derived material is often heated, without combustion of tobacco, to release tobacco flavors without producing all the normal products of tobacco combustion. As the smoker draws air through or around the heat source, the heated air releases tobacco flavors (vapor, aerosol or a mixture) into the smoker's mouth. Again, the heat source temperature is dependent on how the smoker uses the article, so that the flavor release rate varies widely from user to user. The device in U.S. Pat. No. 5,060,671 offers a cigarette-like arrangement to electrically heat a flavor source at a controlled temperature and for the uniformly release of the desired flavor with each puff, without overheating or burning. Microswitches sensitive to a change in pressure or air flow may be used to activate the device when the consumer draws the air. The heater is typically energized from about 0.1 second to about 4 seconds and for a temperature ranging from 100 C to about 600 C.
In addition to flavor, nicotine delivery has been achieved by means of an aerosol. A device in U.S. Pat. No. 4,945,929 includes nicotine and propellant storage containers linked to a nebulization nozzle to produce a nicotine spray. Large droplets in the conical aerosol are removed by impaction before the remaining aerosol pass through a series of baffles to increase evaporation time of the droplets, thus creating a mixture which approximates that of tobacco smoke. Nicotine inhaler devices, based on ultrasonic nebulization, are found in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,920,989 and 4,953,572. To stimulate either the upper respiratory tract or the lower respiratory tract or both, droplets must possess sizes ranging from 1 micron to about 10 microns in diameter. An inhaler was used in conjunction with nicotine patch as a method of aiding in the reduction of incidence of tobacco smoking. An aerosol of nicotine also was produced by an electronic cigarette described in Patent Application No. WO2004080216. The device was non-flammable and offers no tar. An air flow sensor in the smoking-mouth of the cigarette delivered a signal to a circuit to start a high frequency vibrator receiving a nicotine solution from a container via a pipe, thus initiating aerosol formation by nebulization. The end cap in the front of the cigarette included cells and light diodes to give the appearance of a lighted cigarette. This device mimicked the usual smoking pattern and effect, giving the smokers the feel of smoking aside from nicotine delivery. An electronic cigar used a nebulization device. The “smoking liquid” for this device was a diluted nicotine fluid ready for nebulization in the inhaler container. The liquid was purified from tobacco according to the standard FDA GRAS, by biological technology, removing the harmful substances in the tobacco and keeping the safe or useful substances. As described, one ml of liquid was sufficient for about two packs of cigarettes. Another electronic cigar uses “supercritical atomizing technologies”. A piezoelectric inhaler has been described, which includes an array of dispensing channels and an array of dispensing nozzles, to dispense droplets as an electric field applied to the channel walls. The field reduces the volume in an associated channel, creating a pressure pulse of flowable substance that lead to droplet formation. Because droplets per unit time can also be controlled, this approach offers a known volume of the substance sprayed.
A cigarette company that produces a “healthy” cigarette may lead the industry by selling the “novel smoke” at a considerable premium and capture market share from rivals.
Generally, needs exist for improved apparatus and methods for producing a cigarette with the appearance taste and other characteristics of a traditional cigarette with reduced adverse health consequences.